Monsanto v. Durnell · ¶112
With that background, it is easy to see that Durnell’s failure-to-warn claim—which faults Monsanto for not including cancer warnings on the Roundup label—does not trigger preemption under FIFRA. Missouri’s failure-towarn tort punishes the sale of unreasonably dangerous products, like pesticides, without “adequate warning of the danger.” Moore v. Ford Motor Co., 332 S. W. 3d 749, 756 (Mo. 2011) (en banc). As the Missouri Court of Appeals explained, Durnell’s claim has the same “practical effect” as FIFRA’s misbranding prohibition: “[B]oth require a pesticide manufacturer to adequately warn users of the potential dangers of using its product.” 707 S. W. 3d 828, 833 (2025) (internal quotation marks omitted). Durnell’s claim does not impose any labeling requirement that is “in addition to or different from” what FIFRA itself requires, §136v(b); instead, the standards prescribed by federal…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.